Atomic bombs over Tokyo

[John B.]

I've seen a new house rule cropping up about no Atomic bombs on Tokyo. I can see why from a historical perspective (turning the Emperor into a radioactive rice krispie may not be conducive to peace negotiations) but is there some other game related reason why this is showing up? Does it give too many points to the allies?

[Anachro]

No, such a HR is stupid as 1) nuclear bombs are historical, few in number and 2) negatively impact allied VPs automatically make any Allied victory a minor one if used more than twice.





EDIT

Sorry, I saw that this post is about bombing Tokyo specifically. I've not seen this HR, so perhaps others can explain the merits and/or demerits. I don't think there are any beyond the historical reasons, though perhaps some might put all their factories in tokyo or feel the industrial effects are too devastating. From a VP standpoint, atomic bombs should be used sparingly.

[John 3rd]

Good points Sean!

[Lokasenna]

I don't remember the specific number, but I believe I bombed Tokyo twice in my one game to see atomic bombs so far.

The second strike was very devastating, in VP terms. Mind_messing might be able to elaborate on the details of the damage, if he chooses.

[BBfanboy]

IRL, the centre of Tokyo was already obliterated in the firestorm raids of March 1945. There may not have been enough targets worthy of the bombs left in one area to attack.
As in the game, I think Osaka (Kyoto) was the industrial heart of Japan. Not sure why it was not one of the bomb targets.

[Kursk1943]

Hi BBfanboy,
a few days ago I read about it and fortunately I remembered where: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-33755182

It is known that Mr Stimson (US secretary of war) visited Kyoto several times in the 1920s when he was the governor of the Philippines. Some historians say it was his honeymoon destination and that he was an admirer of Japanese culture.

[Macclan5]

For those that are interested....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E96TUffbITo

PBS : The American Experience : Victory in the Pacific

One of the best most balanced reviews of the Atomic Bombs and the end of the war from both side.

Japanese and American Historians reflect on the war after Saipan and the Mariana's

To BB point - target selection is somewhat mysterious.

However as clearly indicated there were numerous persons within the Whitehouse and Administration that were in favor of retaining the Empoerer as a figure head king.

Perhaps the arguements about Hirohito's role factored in.

...And no - offering to retain the Empororer from the Potsdam declaration would NOT have ended the war without the bombs.

As even Japanese historians argue - even the "so called moderates" reviewed the Potsdam Declaration with hope as Stalin did not sign.

[mind_messing]

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I don't remember the specific number, but I believe I bombed Tokyo twice in my one game to see atomic bombs so far.

The second strike was very devastating, in VP terms. Mind_messing might be able to elaborate on the details of the damage, if he chooses.

I'll need to dig up the actual turns, as by that point I wasn't tracking damage to industry. I think it pretty much destroyed half of everything in the hex. I don't think ground units were affected (at least not too badly).

[AcePylut]

If my current game with ChickenBoy makes it to '45 (were at Jan, '42, so it'll take a while), you will see nukes dropped

[BullwinkleMogami]

If you bomb Tokyo you unleash Godzilla. Any further bombs add Gamera.

[rustysi]

I think Osaka (Kyoto) was the industrial heart of Japan. Not sure why it was not one of the bomb targets.

Fire bombed.

To BB point - target selection is somewhat mysterious.

Not really. The US had designated certain Japanese cites as off-limits for bombing. Unfortunately for them they were being 'reserved' for the atom bombs.[:(]

[Macclan5]

ORIGINAL: rustysi

I think Osaka (Kyoto) was the industrial heart of Japan. Not sure why it was not one of the bomb targets.

Fire bombed.

To BB point - target selection is somewhat mysterious.

Not really. The US had designated certain Japanese cites as off-limits for bombing. Unfortunately for them they were being 'reserved' for the atom bombs.[:(]

I have never actually seen any references about the site selection.

Are you suggesting all Fire Bombed cities were excluded from selection ?

I am not 'well read' nor any type of expert in this regards. Its one area of the war that never held my attention in honesty; possibly a shortcoming on my part - so devastating - I lacked the moral or intellectual courage to be better informed.

What is extraordinary about the PBS show I noted above.

That at the 11th hour so to speak;
(1) Nimitz hedged about the invasion
(2) Marshall actually asked MacArthur to revise invasion plans (Magic code breaking vis a vis Numbers of Division in Kyushu and
(3) 'Mac' and other planning staff inquired about using Abombs tactically on the invasion shorelines.

I hesitate to elaborate as this would perhaps cross the line as too political - but if you have any suggestions on good reads please drop a note.

[rustysi]

I have never actually seen any references about the site selection.

Are you suggesting all Fire Bombed cities were excluded from selection ?

Yup. Cold, but true. We wanted the full effect to be visible.

I lacked the moral or intellectual courage to be better informed.

Yup. Difficult to read/contemplate.

but if you have any suggestions on good reads please drop a note.

My reading on the matter was part of a paper written years ago while in school. Even though my major was in electronics/computers I shoved in my true love (history) whenever possible. I'm sure there's something out there and there have been book sites brought up in the forum. If i can think of any or find the thread I'll let you know.

BTW there're quite a few docu's on the matter. You may be able to see some of them on YouTube.

[BBfanboy]

The taboo about thinking about using bombs was broken for me in my first Political Science class in university. One of the assigned books was Herman Kahn's "Thinking About the Unthinkable" which assumed that there were circumstances under which someone in power might decide to use H-bombs. From there it went through the scenarios from single nuke, limited exchange, and total nuclear war.

The point was to figure out what circumstance might make a leader think he should try one of these and to project the consequences both in immediate casualties/damage and likely reactions/counterattacks. The cold-blooded look at what was facing us helped political leaders become more careful to avoid the circumstances that might lead to anyone using a nuke. It was a useful exercise and it may have played a part in the plot of the Hollywood movie "War Games". You remember that one - where the computer ends up going through the calculations of various scenarios and concludes "No one wins."

[Lokasenna]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: Lokasenna

I don't remember the specific number, but I believe I bombed Tokyo twice in my one game to see atomic bombs so far.

The second strike was very devastating, in VP terms. Mind_messing might be able to elaborate on the details of the damage, if he chooses.

I'll need to dig up the actual turns, as by that point I wasn't tracking damage to industry. I think it pretty much destroyed half of everything in the hex. I don't think ground units were affected (at least not too badly).

I just checked. On July 26, 1945, Allied strategic VPs jumped from 16032 to 28532 or +12500. No other strategic bombing occurred that turn besides the a-bomb on Tokyo.

The first strike appears to have made the jump from 11138 to 16032 on July 19.

So the 2 bombs, in this game, were worth about 17.4K VPs.

[spence]

It's worth knowing that dropping two atomic bombs adds to Allied VP total but more than two essentially subtracts.

[Chickenboy]

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

The taboo about thinking about using bombs was broken for me in my first Political Science class in university. One of the assigned books was Herman Kahn's "Thinking About the Unthinkable" which assumed that there were circumstances under which someone in power might decide to use H-bombs. From there it went through the scenarios from single nuke, limited exchange, and total nuclear war.

The point was to figure out what circumstance might make a leader think he should try one of these and to project the consequences both in immediate casualties/damage and likely reactions/counterattacks. The cold-blooded look at what was facing us helped political leaders become more careful to avoid the circumstances that might lead to anyone using a nuke. It was a useful exercise and it may have played a part in the plot of the Hollywood movie "War Games". You remember that one - where the computer ends up going through the calculations of various scenarios and concludes "No one wins."

Alas, I believe this thinking is changing these days. Lots of scenario presentations about how a response to small scale tactical nuclear weapons would pan out, particularly if initial targets were military targets and the nominal yield used was small and controlled. Fading conventional powers may entertain use of these destabilizing weapons to initiate chaos in the command hierarchy of an opponent to sow confusion and dissent within the enemy command itself and between international governments upon which the command rests.

If others are not as absolutist as we are regarding first use of nuclear weapons and they are willing to stomach some retribution casualties to further their ultimate conventional aims, there may be a 'winner' after all. Not all people see 'winning' and 'losing' the same way. "War Games" was a cute movie, but-like so many Hollywood movies-utter pap in terms of nuanced realpolitik.

[Macclan5]

ORIGINAL: rustysi

BTW there're quite a few docu's on the matter. You may be able to see some of them on YouTube.

Yes .. I have scanned some of them.

Hence my recommendation.

The PBS American Experience is in my opinion one of the greatest episodes of a generally fine series; further one of the greatest shows about the Pacific War in general.

Perhaps most of the posters here are very familiar with it; but those that are not should take an hour.

It draws upon the best facts - Japanese and American - about the last year of the war.

Everything from 'Magic' crypto intelligence', Presidential and Japanese War diaries, the overt racism onboth sides, Russian intransigence, the Emperors actions at the end of the war...

Above all the deadly dance that surrounded the term "Unconditional Surrender".

[John B.]

Thanks Lokasenna! That's a LOT of VP. [X(] I'll have too try to keep my VP total from being close enough that a couple of those bad boys tilts me into defeat!

Interesting discussion regarding the A-bombs. A very good book I read on the whole subject was Tennozan by George Feifer who tells the story of Okinawa and the decision to use the bomb. One of his arguments is that if they did not drop the bomb and Japan did not surrender then mass starvation was looming.

[Chickenboy]

Does anyone know if the atomic bomb 'delivery' mission can be intercepted by CAP? Wouldn't that be a bummer...[X(]